No fix for submarines ? Naval units critics

[gunter]

Hi,

submarines still have the landing bomb promotion (?) , will this be fixed into the next expansion ?

Then, nuclear submarine would need uranium by definition.

Then, nuclear submarines are to weak compared to standard submarines, they should be more powerful.

Then, Battleships are weaker in bombarding than Destroyers ( considering the movement factor that brings Destroyer away than safer ) and Battleships cost a huge amount of money. Battleships should be someway strenghtened above all because in the next expansion Destroyer have been reduced to a banal role.

Then, last but not the least, I have read nothing that speaks about improving the total lack of mastering of the AI when using naval units.

You can beat level 7 or 8 just mastering the naval units. I have seen for instance an AI at level 7 building around a dozen of empty carriers or never use the pillage function with naval units. Just to mention an example but there are thousands more regarding the dumbness of AI managing naval units.

My 2 cents

 

[bcaiko]

The change in naval combat alone could make submarines more useful, though I have to admit on the rare occassions I've built them, I have never found them very useful. Perhaps they do deserve a buff.

I do adore Battleships, though! Their 3 range and strength make them effective enough, I should think. Especially since their roll will now be as the "artillery of the sea", making the ranged attacks we assume Destroyers cannot, I don't think they require a buff.

 

[nokmirt]

The naval AI is supposedly much better. I would love to see some video assurance of this. I feel they should give the ironclad a buff and make them ocean going, a more advanced ironclad than Monitor or Virginia, which seems to be what they should represent in the game, based on the unit graphics they use.

They should add a modern attack sub.

Remember that naval combat will be far more interesting due to all units getting 100 HP.

 

[MadDjinn]

with Destroyers going melee attack, Subs should survive a bit longer.

Most likely they'll still require being hidden behind a destroyer ZoC line, and only get really dangerous when they get the range and logistics upgrades (if they survive that long).

but they are cheap and can do major damage to Battleships and Carriers (in vanilla 2x promo in anti-naval allowed a sub to 1-shot a Bship).

In vanilla that didn't mean much, but 'hopefully' the naval AI is going to be better, especially late game.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I wonder if Subs are melee. If so, I wonder if they can attack cities. The idea of taking a city by surprise would be interesting.

 

[MadDjinn]

I wonder if Subs are melee. If so, I wonder if they can attack cities. The idea of taking a city by surprise would be interesting.

I'd hope not.

Torpedoes aren't something that you wander up and hand over.

 

[TylerD]

Just realised, I don't think I've ever built an Ironclad.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm against the idea of subs taking cities unless they can dispatch a special forces team in little rubber boats to attack the city.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I'm against the idea of subs taking cities unless they can dispatch a special forces team in little rubber boats to attack the city.

 

[mo123567]

Just realised, I don't think I've ever built an Ironclad.

I think I built one once just to see what it was like.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I built 2. One, just to try it. The second was rushed to protect a city.

 

[nokmirt]

I think I built one once just to see what it was like.

I built one and it sounded like it was going to break down at any moment, even though it was brand new. A sub ended up putting the poor thing out of its misery.

 

[Haig]

A city with barracks+armory makes an ironclad with already two nice promotions.
After a little combat experience you can turn them into real beasts.
Range promotion and indirect fire, and you can blockade nicely.
(later, upgrade to battleships)

I just love the unit graphs too much not to build them, hope they make them oceangoing though.

P.S. Turtle ships are damn stubborn, Korea attacked me with a navy of 5 turtle ships and two triremes, daaaamn..

P.P.S. American sub sank my carriers once, didn't expect that either! In capable AI hands they could be devastating..

 

[MadDjinn]

I feel they should give the ironclad a buff and make them ocean going, a more advanced ironclad than Monitor or Virginia, which seems to be what they should represent in the game, based on the unit graphics they use.

It would be nice. It might even make some people give up the coal just to use them...

 

[bcaiko]

Well, if you're Polynesia, you already have ocean-faring Ironclads....

 

[Raiki]

Well, if you're Polynesia, you already have ocean-faring Ironclads....

Really? I know that their embarked units can go over ocean tiles (duh), but their ironclads too? What about triremes? I'll confess I've only played them once so far.


~R~

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Yeah, all their units can cross the ocean.

 

[duxup]

Well now I have to build an Ironclad too I guess.


As for the over all question ocean battles and etc have always weird wonky in Civ. There always seems to be some odd man out or wonkyness to how it works. Not a good answer but I've just sort of accepted that.

 

[Bechhold]

Battleships are great and amazing during wartime that is if they are in the right place, and your enemy is just 3-4 moves away.... =/

This is why I wish Firaxis would implement a automatic promotion when discovering Telegraph for naval units that allows +2-3 movement. Or just allow it for Battleships, Destroyers.

 

[vcutag]

Have they said anything about fixing the ability for submarines to cross into enemy waters? It's always driven me crazy that subs no longer have that ability, especially given the lack of map trading.